<div>Hello! <br><br>Our PBIs (via PBIdir or Software Manager) are organized differently than Ports (/usr/ports or on FreshPorts site). Each has its own sets of categories that don&#39;t necessarily overlap. I am not sure exactly how to synchronize the two, since each exists for its own purpose and derivitive (PC-BSD vs FreeBSD) and level of expertise/background.. However, with a move toward greater PBI-Port integration or inter-communication (in v9.0) it seems to be something that should get resolved. Also, the Gramma factor ought to be taken into consideration since PC-BSD is still meant to be an easier to use variant and the simpler PBIdir organization may be best.</div>

<div> </div>
<div>Some ideas how the disparity could be rectified:</div>
<ul>
<li>In the PBIdir or via Software Manager, indicate the location in the port tree where applicable.</li>
<li>Add categories/locations from the ports tree to PBIdir even though a PBI may not populate it.</li>
<li>Fully convert to the ports tree system of organization- unfortunately this substantially reduces the ease-of-use/Gramma factor.</li>
<li>Force FreeBSD ports structure to conform to the PBIdir categories. (not likely; not a serious suggestion)</li>
<li>Add an additional ports tab to the System Manager and indicate the port tree location on the PBIdir site.</li></ul>
<div>There could be a preference to toggle something of an expert mode that would add the complexities of the ports tree. I believe the categories and possibly future sub-categories setup with Software Manager or PBIdir is the direction that things ought to go from an ease-of-use standpoint. I leave it to all of you to hash out the details and methods to tackle this. </div>

<div> </div>
<div>&lt;this is not a self-destructing message&gt; =D</div>